~cnx/ipwhl-discuss

4 2

Re: Repository lifecycles

Details
Message ID
<d0f366b916912481c16bfec9fcfc5a28@disroot.org>
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
I think these schemes make sense.  I would propose these two versioning scheme for them:

- Yearly releases: $YEAR.0.0
- Weekly releases: $YEAR.$MONTH.$WEEK

Where $WEEK is 0-indexed nth of the month.

Re: Repository lifecycles

Details
Message ID
<CBQNO45I2BW5.2B70AEP1D4TVA@debian>
In-Reply-To
<d0f366b916912481c16bfec9fcfc5a28@disroot.org> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
> - Weekly releases: $YEAR.$MONTH.$WEEK

FYI there's also ISO 8601 week dates, e.g. 2042-W69 but I suppose
that it breaks semver.  But should we care about semver?

> - Yearly releases: $YEAR.0.0

How do we visually distinguish this from the weekly releases?
(Honest question, I can't think of the better naming scheme ATM.)

Re: Repository lifecycles

Details
Message ID
<20210530152452.2vzzxntu3bpnt6dj@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To
<d0f366b916912481c16bfec9fcfc5a28@disroot.org> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
Sorry because I forgot to CC the mailing list, and effectively moved the
discussion to private.  Summary of my suggestions:

- Only yearly will have suffix .0.0 and therefore one can `grep \.0\.0`
   to find the yearly releases
- We can name major releases after cheeses, for example, `2022.0.0-alpkaese`,
   so the name is visibly longer with alphabetic characters, thus more
   distinguishible.
   Additionally, one can `grep [a-z]` to find them.  Cheese names are a
   bit hard to remember IMO, or mabye it's just an cheese-uncultured me.

Re: Repository lifecycles

Details
Message ID
<CBSDJ3MEP6O2.DYFS3CABA39R@debian>
In-Reply-To
<20210530152452.2vzzxntu3bpnt6dj@localhost.localdomain> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Sun May 30, 2021 at 10:24 PM +07, Ngô Ngọc Đức Huy wrote:
> Sorry because I forgot to CC the mailing list, and effectively moved the
> discussion to private.  Summary of my suggestions:
>
> - Only yearly will have suffix .0.0 and therefore one can `grep \.0\.0`
>    to find the yearly releases
> - We can name major releases after cheeses, for example, `2022.0.0-alpkaese`,
>    so the name is visibly longer with alphabetic characters, thus more
>    distinguishible.
>    Additionally, one can `grep [a-z]` to find them.  Cheese names are a
>    bit hard to remember IMO, or mabye it's just an cheese-uncultured me.

Sorry for the late reply.  I love the codename idea (who doesn't!),
but with your proposed scheme (security) revisions would look a bit odd,
e.g. 2022.0.0-alpkaese.42.  alpkaese.42 on the other hand doesn't even
look like a release.  Maybe we can s

I'm too tired at the moment to think about this and AFAICT it isn't urgent.
I'm gonna leave this Wikipedia article here for future references:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cheeses

Re: Repository lifecycles

Details
Message ID
<20220515125421.idrtq6rrlxfs4jhb@isanerc>
In-Reply-To
<CBQNO45I2BW5.2B70AEP1D4TVA@debian> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
Since we're using W to denoting weekly releases, I suggest we use Y to
denote yearly releases.  For example, `Y2022`.  Security updates would
be labelled `Y2022.x`, with x starting from 1.
Reply to thread Export thread (mbox)